University of Scranton

Although he is known to many hispanists for the widely anthologized satirical stories «Mister Taylor» and «Primera dama», both from Obras completas (y otros cuentos) [1959], his first collection of short fiction, Guatemalan humorist Augusto Monterroso, a resident of Mexico since 1944, has to date been the object of only three critical studies (Sosnowski, Verzasconi, and Corral) by U. S. hispanists¹⁴⁶. An important factor in Monterroso's marginal status as a «boom» and «postboom» era writer has undoubtedly been his sparse literary production. A decade passed between the publication of Obras completas and his second book, La oveja negra y demás fábulas (Mexico: Joaquín Mortiz, 1969), a collection of modern fables and apologues. Monterroso published two books in the 1970's. Movimiento perpetuo (Mexico: Joaquín Mortiz, 1972) is a collection of short stories, rambling essays, pseudo-philosophical treatises, parodic spoofs, and various hybrid writings, some reminiscent of Arreola and others of Borges. Lo demás es silencio (La vida y la obra de Eduardo Torres) [Mexico: Joaquín Mortiz, 1978] is composed of critical writings, aphorisms, and other miscellany relating to or written by the apocryphal Torres, a folk philosopher, journalist, and would be literary critic from San Blas, S. B., a fictional Mexican center of provincial culture. Much of the text consists of humorous writings published by Monterroso under Torres's name during the 1960's and 1970's in the Revista de la Universidad de México¹⁴⁷.

La palabra mágica (1983), is a collection of Monterroso's writings on his literary interests. These essays, vignettes, fantasies, and reflections on personal literary experiences, are accompanied by photos and sketches in a variety of colors, and are reminiscent in a physical sense of the «collage» style typified by Julio Cortázar's Último round. In his most recent work, La letra e (1987), Monterroso details his personal reactions to a variety of topics related to literature, travel and personal acquaintances. Although it has many thematic affinities with La palabra mágica, La letra e is written in the form of a diary with a chronology that conforms to entries dating from December 10, 1983 through June 1, 1985.

A shift in emphasis from the socio-political satire that characterizes the best stories of Obras completas to parody of popular and literary forms is evident in Monterroso's recent writings. Monterroso's preference for parody reaches a crowning point in Lo demás es silencio, which Corral has called «un "tour de force" paródico»¹⁴⁸. The parodic element in Lo demás es silencio embraces both traditional definitions of parody as simply humorous imitation of other writers and literary styles, and modern critical concepts that stress parody's innately self-conscious nature and self-critical function¹⁴⁹. In fact, Lo demás es silencio is in many respects Monterroso's most important text precisely because its parody involves ironic commentary on his own previous work and broaches such metafictional topics as authorial authority and relationships of author, character and reader. This study examines the variety and function of parody and self-parody in each of the five sections of Lo demás es silencio.

Although Monterroso considers Lo demás es silencio a novel (Carminatti, 95; Moreno-Durán, 146), a more precise generic designation is pseudo-biography, a term specifically included in a list of literary forms that, according to Feinberg (186) , lend themselves to

––––––––   939   ––––––––

parodic treatment¹⁵⁰. Lo demás es silencio is divided into four parts: «Testimonios», «Selectas de Eduardo Torres», «Aforismos, dichos, etc.», and «Colaboraciones espontáneas». An «Addendum» of some ten pages constitutes a fifth division, although it is not numbered as such.

«Testimonios» consists of four sections of personal testimony by close acquaintances and relatives of Torres, each of which parodies a given style of attestation and contains amusing anecdotes about both the attester and Torres.

The first of the four testimonials, titled «Un breve instante en la vida de Eduardo Torres», is written by an anonymous «amigo»; who is promptly identified in a pseudo-scholarly footnote as one «Juan Islas Mercado, conocido también en San Blas por el apodo familiar de Lord Jim (clara alusión literaria a las iniciales de su nombre, que en San Blas por supuesto todos entienden y celebran), ex secretario privado de Eduardo Torres, quien desea así permanecer en el anonimato» (11). In addition to the allusion to Conrad's work and the ironic reference to the level of literary culture in San Blas noted by Corral (Viaje al centro, 1ª ed., 156), the blatant disclosure of the friend's identity in the same sentence that avows his desire to remain anonymous typifies Monterroso's playful attitude toward literature and announces a pattern of self-contradiction that prevails in much of the testimonial section.

The «breve instante» of the tide is a visit to the Torres home by a commission of San Blas dignitaries, who entreat Torres to accept the candidacy for governor of the province, a request that the protagonist humbly declines. The highly stylized descriptions of everyday scenes, the excess of descriptive detail, and the melodramatic tone of this dull episode are carried to a point of absurdity, in clear parody of mood setting techniques of Gothic romances. A description of the sun shining through the window, for example, is given as follows: «Por el alto y espacioso ventanal irrumpen en acelerado tropel varios rayos de sol, de los cuales cinco o seis han ido a anidar amorosamente en la altiva cabeza más bien encanecida de nuestro biografiado» (12- 13). The absurd personification and enumeration of «cinco o seis» sunrays, and such archaic expressions as «nuestro biografiado» in mock imitation of nineteenth-century novelistic techniques, clearly signal the parodic intent.

«Lord Jim», the narrator, assigns himself a melodramatic role in the episode that is incongruous with the mundane circumstances of the visit he describes: «Desde atrás de la espesa y pesada cortina de tonos vagamente grisáceos en que me oculto pistola en mano, listo para repeler... cualquier sorpresiva agresión, veo cómo Eduardo Torres... les responde sencillamente que no, que su misión es otra» (15). Torres declares in a speech filled with pretentious classical and historical allusions that he prefers the noble world of pure intellect to the mundane and vulgar realm of political power, an answer which, according to the narrator, «hizo salir a aquellos individuos cabizbajo [sic] y con la cola entre las piernas, como cuando en las tardes, a la luz mortecina del crepúsculo, el rebaño, que escucha atento la voz de los pastores, se va recogiendo paso a paso» (17-18).

Written by Luis Jerónimo Torres, Eduardo's brother, the second testimonial, entitled «E. Torres. Un caso singular», differs from the list in both style and substance. The narration, interspersed with undisciplined and often nonsensical digressions, reveals a thinly veiled envy and hostility toward the more successful sibling Eduardo. Luis Jerónimo's speech parodies the ambivalent attitude of admiration and resentment inherent in the popular testimonial form, an ambivalence that finds for mal expression in the ritualized custom of rendering tribute to a popular figure through a «roasting» ceremony. Although it is profoundly bitter, this testimonial contains a generous dose of humor that results from Luis Jerónimo's disingenuous attempts to denigrate his brother while ostensibly praising him. In his recollection of Eduardo's founding of the «Suplemento Dominical» of the local Heraldo de San Blas, for example, Luis Jerónimo backhandedly remarks that this cultural publication «como la luz de esas estrellas que los astrónomos registran en su telescopio después de millones de años de extinguidas, sigue iluminando los hogares samblasenses aún después de quince o veinte minutos de leído» (19).

Jerónimo's poorly dissimulated resentment is perhaps most evident in his humorous description of Eduardo's early childhood. He tells of «un niño robusto, aunque algo feo y de piernas más bien demasiado largas», «who was dropped to the floor by an aunt

––––––––   940   ––––––––

(se sospecha que involuntariamente)» during the celebration of his first birthday. On that occasion Eduardo remained unconscious for more than half an hour, a fact that later caused his parents some anguish «sobre todo porque a la edad de cinco años no había pronunciado aún su primera palabra, que finalmente no fue ni "papá" ni "mamá", sino "libro"» (25). Luis Jerónimo maintains, however, that within a month and a half of his first word Eduardo was an avid reader. He adds that even today many of the history and science volumes in the local library preserve physical traces of his precocious legacy, usually chocolate or in some cases«una materia más tenue que ha logrado identificarse como saliva acaramelada». (26)

That Luis Jerónimo's fraternal envy is offset by a sense of familial loyalty is evidenced by his unwillingness to disclose the details of an apparently reproachable private side of Eduardo. Despite a seemingly malicious allusion to some repugnant writings by Eduardo on sexual attraction that constitute «un escondido tesoro de verdades sobre la vida subterránea», a footnote at the end of this testimonial assures the reader that, before committing suicide, Luis Jerónimo destroyed «por escrúpulos de conciencia... todo lo relativo a la pubertad y demás vida sexual de E. T.» (29).

The third and longest of the testimonials, by Luciano Zamora, Torres's valet and private secretary, parodies the tendency of some attesters to talk mainly about themselves, or to attempt to boost their own worth by making the focus of the testimony their intimate association with the honoree. In this case the testimonial has almost nothing to do with Torres. Aside from an occasional reference to his close relationship with Torres, Zamora devotes almost the entire thirty-five page document to himself, in particular his fondness for novels and pornography, his propensity for masturbation, and the various amorous infatuations of his youth. Despite his alleged love of reading and his grudging admiration of Torres's erudition and culture, Zamora's contribution reveals a narcissistic obsession with the physical that renders him incapable of comprehending even the most elementary philosophical distinctions, as evidenced by his remarks on carnal and platonic love as the topic relates to his first love affair: «Por lo que a mí se refería, todos sabemos que hay amor carnal y amor platónico. Pero esto no es tan simple. Yo estoy seguro que el mío era platónico-carnal o carnal y platónico a la vez, pues en cuanto pensaba en ella sentía algo en la carne, o en cuanto sentía algo en la carne pensaba en ella» (61)

The final testimonial by Torres's wife Carmen is titled «Hablar de un esposo siempre es difícil». It is labeled a «grabación» perhaps because, as Carmen herself insinuates, she is virtually illiterate. The style is informal and chatty, and the predominant sentiment expressed is irritation that someone so ordinary and lazy as Eduardo (or Lalo, as she calls him) should deserve the renown and honors that have been bestowed upon him. Portraying herself as the typical Mexican «mujer sufrida», she refers to her «paciencia para soportar... sus lecturas y sus pretensiones de tipo amoroso, que no se puede decir que hayan llegado nunca al erotismo» (65).

Carmen's testimonial parodies the most naive type of attestation, in which the testifier unwittingly reveals embarrassing details of the private life of the would be public person¹⁵¹. Nonetheless, her openness and candor provide a refreshing contrast to Luis Jerónimo's transparent malice and Zamora's egotistical vulgarity. If Eduardo is an important person in San Blas, she says, «debe ser porque aquí nadie sabe nada y no me importa que se enteren de que lo digo porque ellos también lo dicen» (70). Most annoying to Carmen is Eduardo's constant obsession with reading and writing. She relates how he often wakes up in the middle of the night, turns on the light, jots something down on a piece of paper, goes back to sleep, and occasionally reawakens to repeat the entire operation. «Cuando no se le ocurre nada» says Carmen in apparent earnest, «escribe pensamientos» (82). Despite such irritating character defects, however, Carmen assures the reader of her eternal affection for Lalo.

The second major division of the work, «Selectas de Eduardo Torres», shifts attention from the popular testimonial to more serious literary forms. Here the reader experiences firsthand the breadth of Torres's interests and the variety of his critical and essayistic writings. This section includes, among other items: a naive critical review of a new edition of the Quijote; an essay written by the apparently monolingual Torres on the subtleties and potential pitfalls of translation; a provincial interpretation of a forgotten octava by Góngora;

––––––––   941   ––––––––

a «Decalogue of the Writer» that consists of twelve, not ten, pieces of advice or wisdom, thereby allowing readers to choose those they prefer and reject any two; a series of childlike sketches accompanied by an essay on the «Día mundial del animal viviente»; and a somewhat sarcastic critical review of a book by Augusto Monterroso.

The erudite tone, pretentious allusions and ingenuous content of these texts leave little doubt as to the author's parodic intent¹⁵². In the commentary on the new edition of the Quijote, for example, Torres solemnly informs the reader that the «conocido y ya clásico escritor peninsular don Miguel de Cervantes Saavedra» received the nickname Manco de Lepanto «por el defecto que le quedó después de la batalla del mismo nombre, y en la que, como se sabe, la Invencible Armada fue vencida» (87-88) . And although Torres does not hesitate to recommend this magnificent work to the youth of Mexico, he cannot resist pointing out several typos, which he feels may harm the prestige of Cervantes: «Por ejemplo, en la página 38 puede leerse que el protagonista dice "fuyan" en lugar de huyan, como es lo correcto; más adelante hay un "hideputa" que hiere la vista. Debió ser... pero no lastimemos el oído de nuestras delicadas damitas» (89). Fortunately for the uninformed reader, an indignant and sarcastic letter to the editor protesting Torres's historical, linguistic and literary ignorance is published in a later issue of the Revista de la Universidad de México, where Torres's comments first appeared, and is included in Lo demás es silencio.

The metafictional intrigues of Lo demás es silencio begin with Torres's review of the second edition of Monterroso's second book, La oveja negra y demás fábulas. Commenting sarcastically on the long period of improductivity following the publication of Monterroso's first work, Obras completas, Torres notes that like Rilke with his Elegías de Duino, Monterroso wrote La oveja negra «en un rapto de inspiración, con la salvedad de que a nuestro autor ese rapto le duró alrededor de diez años» (120). Torres adds that Monterroso's «parquedad corre parejas con su lentitud. De donde resulta que no sólo nos hace esperar sino que cuando se decide y nos da, nos da poco en cantidad» (121-22).

Torres's opinion of fables in general and Monterroso's work in particular is ambivalent at best. After calling attention to the satirical element in Monterroso's fables, Torres offers the opinion that satire has yielded positive results in all eras, though in the modern one «las malas costumbres prácticamente no existen, excepto en manos de viciosos y tipos por el estilo» (121). Notwithstanding his apparent approval of satire, Torres reproaches Monterroso, to whom he refers as «nuestro inquieto autor» and «nuestro curioso autor», for his skeptical and pessimistic view of mankind. This attitude, Torres believes, causes Monterroso to avoid human themes and to seek refuge «en el vasto mundo de los animales y otros seres mitológicos igualmente despreciados» (123).

Nowhere is Monterroso's debt to Cervantes, Montaigne and Swift, whom he has called his most important literary influences (Peralta, 134), more evident than in the «Selectas» section of Lo demás es silencio. Although the influence of Montaigne and Swift is apparent in the essayistic form and satirical expression, Monterroso finds the greatest potential for the development of Eduardo Torres's fictional world in the Cervantine model of metafictional parody. Like don Quijote, Eduardo Torres is a naive reader of literature whose comments occasionally reveal a flash of insight, but more often indicate radical confusion regarding the nature of fiction, an inability to distinguish between the figurative and the literal and, at times, fiction and reality¹⁵³.

The general observation that parody is by nature a type of literary criticism because it exaggerates the excesses, affectation, and absurdity of literary expression, is a commonplace in modern critical writings about parody (see, for example, Alter, 25; Falk, 8; Feinberg, 185; and Rose, 14, 35 and 45). Both Cervantes and Monterroso, however, take this critical function of parody one step further by exaggerating the pretentious and absurd qualities of literary interpretation, so that their works contain parodic critiques of the critical tradition and the critical idiom. Rose notes that presenting the protagonist as a naive reader is one method of directing the attention of the reader to himself as object of criticism in the text (63). Cervantes, for example, answers criticism of the first volume of his masterwork by having don Quijote learn of his own fame as a literary character and eventually confront other readers (such as the Duke and Duchess) who have read of his adventures and vulgarly misinterpret his character.

––––––––   942   ––––––––

Monterroso likewise answers real, anticipated or invented criticism by presenting as his main character a naive reader and petty critic of his (Monterroso's) own work. Torres's barbed jabs at Monterroso bring an element of self-parody to a metafictional power struggle between character and author of the type that have become increasingly common in modern fiction since Unamuno's Niebla and Pirandello's Six Characters in Search of an Author. In addition, however, Torres's critique of Monterroso serves the heuristic purpose of bringing into sharper focus the complex relationship between author, character, and reader (or critic), and of ridiculing common types of popular critical reactions to literary works, such as ad hominem attack.

«Aforismos, dichos, etc.», the third major division of the Lo demás es silencio, consists of maxims, proverbs, aphorisms, and so on by Eduardo Torres, collected from a variety of sources by one don Juan Manuel CarrasquiIla, «estudioso», and organized under an alphabetized listing of general topics, such as «Abstinencia», «Amistad», «Amor», etc. Perhaps because concise truisms of this type traditionally express the oddly insightful perspectives that are Torres's specialty, a number of what appears to be perfectly serious adages are intermingled in the selection. Thus, Torres's thoughts on «work» contain a scathing censure of Mexico and many other countries: «Mientras en un país haya niños trabajando y adultos sin trabajo, la organización de ese país es una mierda» (153). Likewise, the following criticism that appears under the heading «Unir esfuerzos» is not as restricted as the reference to San Blas would suggest: «En San Blas muchos políticos esencialmente estúpidos o ladrones sólo esperan el momento de alcanzar el poder para combinar estas dos cualidades» (153).

In most instances, however, the writings of the «Aforismos» section observe the formal conventions of genres associated with terse witticisms while offering absurd or nonsensical content¹⁵⁴. Thus, on the question of whether writers are made or born, Torres proclaims the following: «Digan lo que dijeren, el escritor nace, no se hace. Puede ser que finalmente algunos nunca mueran: pero desde la Antigüedad es raro encontrar alguno que no haya nacido» (137). Here, as in other cases, the absurdity and humor result from Torres's literal interpretation of the figurative use of a word or expression, in this case nacer. In other instances these adages take the form of simple statements of the self-evident. This too results in absurdity, since aphorisms, maxims and related forms are normally not used to direct attention to the obvious, but rather to essential truths that are not easily perceived. For example, Torres asserts the following with regard to the topic of «genius»: «De no ser por los genios la Humanidad carecería de las mejores obras de que hoy disfruta» (139). Perhaps the best example is a thought that Torres entered into his notebook after a late evening stroll through San Bias: «¡Pocas cosas como el Universo!» (153)

This section also contains numerous allusions to other sections of Lo demás es silencio, to Monterroso's other works, and to living, deceased and fictional authors. For example, the statement «La Sinfonía Inconclusa es la obra más acabada de Schubert» is a clear reference to «Sinfonía concluida» a humorous short story in Monterroso's Obras completas. The terse entry «Es dura» listed under the heading «Ley» refers to a translation of the Latin apothegm «dura lex, sed lex» which, according to Luis Jerónimo, Eduardo Torres made up as a child. Other allusions in this section are to classical and modern authors of various nationalities, to Mexican satirical essayists Carlos Monsiváis and Gabriel Zaid, and to other Mexican writers such as Salvador Elizondo, Elena Poniatowska, José Revueltas and Juan Rulfo¹⁵⁵.

The fourth major division of the work «Colaboraciones espontáneas» consists of only two items: «El burro de San Blas» a popular satirical sonnet that begins by attempting to expose the ignorance of a local critic with intellectual pretentions, apparently Eduardo Torres, and ends by insulting the reader; and a critical analysis of the sonnet, submitted to the publisher under a pseudonym. The critic claims to have written the analysis at the request of the publisher, but a publisher's note indicates that the article was unsolicited.

This section is clearly a parody of both metafictional literature and the critical rhetoric and terminology that is often used to describe it. The long, digressive and absurd analysis praises the sonnet as the work of a superior intellect, ridicules the base level of readership, and hints that Torres himself may be the poem's author. It is also insinuated that the author of the analysis is Torres, so that

––––––––   943   ––––––––

in one reading the naive reader writes a pretentious and inane critical article on an infantile text perhaps written by himself, a fictional situation that ironically parallels Monterroso's mock criticism of his own texts through Torres's critical writings. The alternating insinuation and denial of Torres's authorship of both the sonnet and the critical article carries the implication that both the poem and the article, or perhaps one or the other, may be parodies of Torres's style written by someone else, in other words parody within parody. Not content to present a critical article that is perhaps a parody of the critical writings of a character whose writings parody literary criticism, however, Monterroso has the San Blas critic describe the relationship of the poem to its author and readers (both objects of its criticism) with language that obviously parodies the critical idiom used to analyze complex metafictional situations:

The fifth division, «Addendum», contains a «Punto final» in which Torres reflects on his writings and other aspects of his life highlighted in the homage. He thanks Joaquín Díez-Canedo, the director of the Joaquín Mortiz publishing company, for sending him the galley proof of the work and asking his authorization for its publication. He also manages an additional couple of gibes at the author of the work (Monterroso) who, he says, «goza de cierta fama de burlón que (y perdónenme) no acaba de gustarme» (173). Citing Monterroso's «carencia de método» and blaming him for the untimely publication of the Quijote review in the Revista de la Universidad de México, Torres apologizes for any polemics he may have provoked. He also assures readers that he changed nothing in the testimonial section «excepto cuando una que otra coma mal puesta así lo requirió» (174), perhaps a reference to Monterroso's alleged obsession with such details as the proper placement of commas, to which he ironically refers in an interview with José Miguel Oviedo (53).

Parody, then, takes a variety of forms in Lo demás es silencio. As Corral has noted (195), pranks, inanities and authorial eccentricities, such as the list of abbreviations that appears among the final items of the «Addendum» and contains only such standard forms as Dr. (doctor), etc. (etcétera), Vol. (volumen), and Sra. (señora), surface throughout the work and constitute what might be called a «trivial» or «superficial» level of parodic expression. In the «Testimonios» section, where other characters write about Torres, parody of informal and popular literary styles serves to question the sincerity of rituals of public flattery and to undermine the value of sentimentality or nostalgic affectation. The writings attributed to Torres, in contrast, constitute a parodic element of metafictional dimensions. Here characters, author(s), readers and critics are at the same time both instruments and objects of parody, which takes the form of ironic and often insightful commentary on the literary and critical traditions in general, and on specific texts by Monterroso and other writers.

Monterroso's talent for parodic expression, his detailed knowledge of Classical and modern literary traditions, his innovative style and satirical wit, combine to make him one of the preeminent humorists of the Spanish language. Although he considers himself pessimistic and his writings are often bitter (Oviedo, 52-53; Ruffinelli, «La audacia cautelosa», 19-20), Monterroso's urbane humor and appreciation of the absurd are never far from the surface. The paucity of his work no longer provides an excuse for critical neglect: in six books, an Antología personal, and countless uncollected writings, Monterroso has shown remarkable thematic and stylistic variety. His works are complex, highly original, and filled with surprises and hidden intrigues. Despite the current scarcity of critical attention afforded him, the quality of his modest but expanding corpus of writings makes it likely Monterroso will one day enjoy the recognition he deserves as perhaps the finest and most subtle humorist in all of Spanish America and one of the region's most accomplished contemporary writers.

Abrams, M. H. A Glossary of Literary Terms. 4th ed. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1981.

Alter, Robert. Partial Magic: The Novel as a Self-Conscious Genre. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1975.

Barnet, Sylvan, et al. A Dictionary of Literary, Dramatic and Cinematic Terms. 2nd ed. Boston: Little, Brown and Co., 1971.

Bennett, David. «Parody, Postmodernism, and the Politics of Reading». Critical Quarterly 27.4 (1985): 27-43.

Bradley, Linda. «The Aesthetics of Postmodern Parody: An Extended Definition». The Comparatist 7 (1983): 36-47.

Carminatti, Graciela. «La experiencia literaria no existe». Monterroro, Viaje al centro. 2ª ed. 95-125.

Corral, Wilfrido H. Lector, sociedad y género en Monterroso. Xalapa, México: Centro de Investigaciones Lingüístico-Literarias, 1985.

——. «Monterroso: El escritor como actor y observador de sus cuentos, fábulas, ensayos, viñetas y biografías». Monterroso, Viaje al centro. 1ª ed. 123-59.

Falk, Robert P., ed. The Antic Muse: American Writers in Parody. New York: Grove Press, 1955.

Feinberg, Leonard. Introduction to Satire. Ames, Iowa: The Iowa State University Press, 1967.

Holman, C. Hugh. A Handbook to Literature. 3rd. ed. Indianapolis: The Odyssey Press, 1972.

Monterroso, Augusto. Lo demás es silencio (La vida y la obra de Eduardo Torres). México: Joaquín Mortiz, 1978.

——. Las ilusiones perdidas: Antología personal. México: Fondo de Cultura Económica, 1985.

——. La letra e [fragmentos de un diario]. México: Ediciones Era, 1987.

——. Movimiento perpetuo. México: Joaquín Mortiz, 1969.

——. Obras completas (y otros cuentos) 6ª ed. México: Joaquín Mortiz, 1980.

——. La oveja negra y demás fábulas. México: Joaquín Mortiz, 1969.

——. La palabra mágica. México: Ediciones Era, 1983.

——. Viaje al centro de la fábula. 1ª ed. México: Universidad Nacional Autónoma, 1981.

——. Viaje al centro de la fábula. 2ª ed. México: Martín Casillas, 1983.

Moreno-Durán, Rafael Humberto. «La insondable tontería humana». Monterroso, Viaje al centro. 2ª ed. 141-55.

Oviedo, José Miguel. «El humor es triste». Monterroso, Viaje al centro. 2ª ed. 51-59.

Peralta, Elda. «Que el autor desaparezca». Monterroso, Viaje al centro. 2ª ed. 129-37.

Rose, Margaret A. Parody/Metafiction: An Analysis of Parody as a Critical Mirror to the Writing and Reception of Fiction. London: Croom Helm, Ltd., 1979.

Ruffinelfi, Jorge. «La audacia cautelosa». Monterroso, Viaje al centro. 2ª ed. 9-29.

——, ed. Monterroso. Xalapa, México: Centro de Investigaciones Lingüístico-Literarias, 1976.

Shaw, Harry. A Dictionary of Literary Terms. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1972.

Shipley, Joseph T. The Dictionary of World Literature: Criticism -Forms- Technique. 2nd ed. Paterson, NJ: Littlefield, Adams and Co., 1964.

Solares, Josefina, e Ignacio Solares. «Inutilidad de la sátira». Monterroso, Viaje al centro. 2ª ed. 43-48.

Sosnowski, Saúl. «Augusto Monterroso: La sátira del poder». Zona Franca: Revista de Literatura 19.3 (1980): 53-57.

Verzasconi, Ray. «El humorismo en las Obras completas de Augusto Monterroso». Proceedings of the Pacific Northwest Conference on Foreign Languages 28 (1977): 138-41.

Hispania [Publicaciones periódicas]. Volume 72, Number 4, December 1989